Undoing Some of the Damage

The new Obama administration has put together a list of over 200 policies and executive orders that they hope will begin to undo some of the damage the Bush administration has caused. They hope this will begin to move our country into a more progressive direction. These new actions include administration on climate change, stem cell research, and reproductive rights to mention a few. The one that is especially exciting to me is President-elect Obama's commitment to lifting the "global gag rule" that Bush reinstated on his first day in office in January 2001. The gag rule bars speech and action in reproductive health and endangers women's lives.

THIS is exactly why we elected him!

For more steps in the right direction, see this article in the NYT.

Globalization AND Bad Decisions at Fault

I got into a wee bit debate at Feministing over the story of "Yang Peiyi (on the right) who had the perfect voice, [while] Lin Miaoke (on the left) had the perfect face."

China is doing all they can to impress the world over the course of these few weeks. Sometimes, however, money can't buy image. Even though these are the most expensive Olympic Games in history, they leave a lot to be desired. Not from the Olympians, because, don't get me wrong, they're doing a kick-ass job, but from China as a nation.

First, the homeless are forcibly displaced, fake fireworks, and urging people, "to quit smoking and spitting, and to adopt the Western custom of standing in line for a bus, instead of jostling." Now, it has come out that the beautiful singing of Yang Peiyi was the actual voice behind the adorable face of Lin Miaoke. Don't get me wrong, Yang Peiyi is a very cute girl! But unfortunately, her county did not deem her as "cute enough" to sing the "Ode to the Motherland." The rationale? "The reason was for the national interest. The child on camera should be flawless in image, internal feelings, and expression."

This sends several messages to little girls.
1. Talent isn't enough. You have to have "the look" to get anywhere...
2. If you do have "the look," you will get exploited for it, for the best interest of your country, of course...

We all agree this is disgusting. But the wee bit of a disagreement i got into on Feministing was because i think it goes beyond just China fucking up. I think there's a lot to be said for why they deemed Lin Miaoke "cuter." I argued that the girl who was chosen fits more in line with a Western standard of girlish cuteness. I also said that it's not entirely China's fault but the fault of a Western standard of beauty that has spread through globalization. Brad argued that i was using globalization as a cop-out and MewKunn called me mean and rude for ascertaining that Miaoke wasn't "Asian enough" (which i didn't...)

China is concerned with putting forward a specific image. One that, to some degree, mimics the US. They are working hard to keep up with US's consumption, technology, and urbal living, which is very difficult to do with a population over 1.3 billion people. I'm not saying this as it's a good thing. The US isn't the popular kid here, inviting China to sit at the cool kid's table at lunch... No. Rather as a negative of the traditions and culture lost due to the spread of globalization. I fully realize that China has it's own culture, traditions, and fashion which are unique to their nation. Globalization, however, has vast effects on beauty standards among many other things. For example, Chinese media is saturated with advertisements for eye-widening plastic surgery and skin whitening products. This isn't because the Western and European look is "better" but because it is now being widespread through media, advertising, and globalization. Which leads me back to Yang Peiyi and Lin Miaoke, the two adorable girls taught an unfortunate life lesson at the tender ages of 7 and 9.

For a country so consumed with their current image, this did not make them look good...

IMO, China made a choice to cast the more stereotypically Western looking girl and chalk it up to being, "flawless in terms of her facial expression and the great feeling she can give to people." The pig tails, the big toothy smile, the lighter, long hair... that's all Western little girl "cute." And it's deemed "better" and "cuter" because of the globalized standard of beauty and cuteness. China's attempt to cast the "cuter" girl for the way she looks is intertwined with Western standards of girlishness and cuteness and since all eyes are on China right now, they are trying to fit in as much as possible with these standards.

And to address MewKunn's concern: I don't think it was Lin Niaoke's choice to look the way she does or get chosen for the reasons she did. I also think that it works to her disadvantage too that she was chosen solely based on her looks and not her talent. And it teaches her a lesson that she is not talented enough, but her looks matter. This is a lesson many women learn, early on. That they are chosen, selected, picked, dated, hired, based solely on their looks alone. She is not the one to blame, or target. Who IS at fault are the individuals who chose her based her looks and why they thought her look was "better." She may have not chosen to have the Western standard of beauty features that i discussed but i do believe a big reason she was chosen to appear on screen was because she DOES have these features. There is a difference. And the difference is one that is wrapped up in globalization, childhood, beauty standards, choices, and image.

The Story of Stuff and why you should care.

Thanks to Jenna for sending me The Story of Stuff. This video is the best presentation that i've seen to date of America's massive consumer problem.

You should absolutely watch the video, it's a great presentation of this enormous problem that needs a lot more attention. The video breaks up the process into 5 parts: extraction, production, distribution, consumption, and disposal. Here's my summary of why "stuff" is such a huge problem in our country:

Let's start with extraction. We use the planet's resources for everything that we need. Obviously some of the stuff made fulfills actual needs. We can't expect everyone to live like Thoreau, especially in contemporary America when having all the latest gadgets and designer "stuff" is crucial to survival (ok, a wee bit of sarcasm there but for real, we can't just expect people to give up consumer goods that they think make them happy). So what's the problem at the stage of extraction? 1. We're using too much stuff; 2. The way we're getting the stuff is damaging our planet; 3. America get's an F in kindergarten (aka: we're not sharing our stuff).

Next we move on to production. This is where we actually make the stuff that people think they need. Since this is all done in factories, with toxic chemicals, the problems at this stage are endless. For example, toxic chemicals = toxic products... what's that? toxic toys for your toddlers? Shit... that seems like an issue already. Not to mention the workers that are outsourced, underpaid, and treated unethically due to the harmful effects of these chemicals on humans and the environment. Oh and did i mention, the US realizes this is a health and environmental issue so we outsource this step to other countries. Yeay to globalization! We can bring out toxins into countries where we know there will be people willing to work for not enough money, in hazardous conditions, while we use up their natural resources... awesome.

That's too depressing. Let's talk about distribution, this is the part where we actually get our stuff. The goal here is to sell stuff quickly and cheaply. But at what expense? We pollute the environment by getting the stuff from these other countries to the US, use up natural resources faster than the planet can replenish them, and harm human beings. Basically, sure it's cool that the price tags on our stuff (think: WalMart) don't actually represent the cost of production (remember planet resources, people's health, our ozone), but is it all worth it? Personally, I don't think so. Sorry, i got ahead of myself...

I think that was along the lines of consumption. This whole cycle of trashing our planet to make cheap stuff doesn't seem very sustainable. That's because it's not. The crazy thing is (and I did not know this until watching "The Story of Stuff") that this whole cycle was engineered by a really smart man (I think named Victor Laboe, but if anyone can correct me on this i'd really like to know more about him) after WWII as a way to "ramp up the economy." He said the following:

President Eisenhower thought this was a great idea and that the US's main purpose should be to produce more goods... How is this possible? Well by making products that will be quickly discarded or replaced, this is called "planned obselensence." For example, my biggest pet peeve is the constant flow of coffee cups, water bottles, and plastic utensils that Americans go through daily. Is it really that difficult to bring in silverware to work and wash it after lunch? "Over 380 billion plastic bags, sacks, and wraps are used in the U.S. each year, and 1 trillion worldwide - over one million per minute! Billions of plastic bags end up as litter each year."

Still on consumption, there's also "perceived obsolescence." This is the idea that even your new or perfectly working stuff should be replaced. You know, to "keep up with the Joneses." IPods, laptops, cell-phones, TVs, even clothes are all examples. If you don't have the latest trend, everyone knows that you haven't contributed to the consumer market lately. Anyone watch The Real Housewives of Orange County? They're a perfect example. Is this still prevalent in politics now? Absolutely: After 9/11, Bush suggested for the American people to SHOP. I don't know about you but shopping doesn't seem like a healthy way to mourn. However, since "we have become a nation of consumers and it makes up our identity," this seemed to be Bush's main concern... well that and finding WMDs (but that's a different post altogether)...

Finally, disposal... First, an outrageous fact: "6 months after we (Americans) buy stuff, only 1% of it is still in use!" Another words, 99% is discarded. Talk about wasteful. Here's the problem, after extraction (using up natural resources to make the stuff we "need"), production (sending harmful chemicals and toxins into our atmosphere to make the stuff we "need), distribution (getting people the stuff they "need"), and consumption (people using up the stuff they "needed"), there's disposal. Disposal (well and extraction) is the part of this whole cycle that scares me most. Disposal is getting rid of all this stuff that people once "needed" and now used up... Where can we possibly put all this stuff that isn't necessarily recyclable? Do we bury it (thus filling up our earth with non-recyclable and possibly toxic stuff)? Do we burn it (thus sending even more chemicals - that are actually even more toxic than they were in the first place - into the air)? How do we dispose of all this stuff that we once "needed?"

Here in lies the problem - we, as a people, can't possibly recycle ALL the stuff that we consume and burying & burning our old stuff only creates more problems... the only solution is to use/purchase/own/want less stuff. Yes, regulating production so that it's cleaner and uses less natural resources is a great place to start. And yes, composting and recycling should be an expectation for everyone, but ultimately, this problem... of "stuff"... will remain a problem until people stop wanting, using, and "needing" so much.

Because, like always, it's all about activism, here is what YOU can do to change this cycle:

1. Watch The Story of Stuff

2. Host showings, talk about it, educate others - activism begins with education.

3. Change yourself and your "needs." Do you really need that new cell phone just because it has one upgrade or is your, perfectly working phone, sufficient?

4. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. It's really as easy as that.

5. Cloth shopping bags have been all the rage lately, jump on that bandwagon and i promise you'll find the cloth bags are not only earth saving but much more convenient (the strap is easier to carry and doesn't cut into your hand like plastic).

6. If you forget your cloth bags at home, carry your items (either by hand or take the cart to your car and unload without bags) if that's not an option for you, ask for paper bags.

7. Use tupperware instead of aluminum, styrofoam, or plastic wrap.

8. Reuse discarded paper for scrap, or print on both sides of the document.

9. Take the "Billion Bag, Bottle, and Bulb Challenge"

10. Here to learn more about what you can do to take action and help stop this vicious cycle.

Please watch the video, and definitely leave feedback as well as other ways to stop this cycle. What do you do to live a more sustainable life? Leave tips for fellow readers! :)